Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

54746 readers

222 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others

Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):

💰 Please help cover server costs.


Ko-fi	Liberapay

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

377

Internet Archive forced to remove 500,000 books after publishers’ court win (arstechnica.com)

submitted 5 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

54 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I don't follow. The Internet Archive only allows 1 copy of each physical book to be loaned at a time. If someone has the book you want already, then you need to wait until their loan expires. It's not like shadow libraries that allow unrestricted DRM-free downloading.

And publishers' profits are rising and don't seem to be at all correlated to library access, so of course nobody is suggesting they should close.

What am I not understanding?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

During the pandemic, Internet Archive very publicly announced they were relaxing their one physical copy per digitally loaned copy.

I think of they had maintained their 1:1 CDL method, the publishers would still be uncomfortable to be the one to sue first, especially since there was a decent argument and IA would have been pretty sympathetic.

Their pandemic policy was effectively not substantially different from a shadow library., and just set up a slam dunk case for the publishers.